Sep Oct 2015-final · 2018. 6. 8. · September October 2015 3 Subscriptions Subscription price for...

The Agricultural

M A G A Z I N E

September/October 2015

Volume 88Issue 2

State Supervisors and Teacher Educators Refl ecting on the Past While Looking to the Future

EDUCATION

2 The Agricultural Education Magazine

Dr. Harry N. Boone, Jr., is a Professor at West Virginia University and Editor of The Agricultural Education Magazine.

EDITOR COMMENTS

Does Agricultural Education Have a Future?by Harry N. Boone, Jr.

This is the second issue devoted to the topic of “refl ecting on the past while looking to the fu-

ture.” Over the past two issues I have encountered a familiar prob-lem with agricultural educators at all levels. They do not like to “toot their own horn.” Keep in mind the old proverb that says “He that toots not his own horn, the same shall not be tooted.” I have had trouble with people not wanting to share their story because they feel their story is not unique. I feel that everyone has a unique story to tell.

For this editorial I am going to devote my comments to “does agricultural education have a fu-ture?” I could answer this ques-tion with one word, “yes,” and stop, however, that would leave a lot of blank space on this space. While blank/white space has a role in a publication, two thirds of a page is frowned upon.

Does agricultural education have a future? Again the answer is “yes,” however there are some lessons from the past we must car-ry forward to the future. It is easy to listen to the buzz words of to-day and modify our curriculums to fi t. The buzz words of today, how-ever, will quickly be replaced by the buzz words of tomorrow and if we are not careful the agricultural education programs built on those buzz words will fade as quickly as the trends they tried to emulate.

What were the basic princi-ples that early agricultural educa-

tion programs contained? Others may disagree, however, I would argue that the components that made agricultural education great were; experiential learning (what we know as SAEs today), instruc-tion through problem solving, kin-esthetic learning, and the use of leadership as a motivational tool. Regardless of the curriculum ag-ricultural education must contain these elements to remain strong.

A strong agricultural educa-tion program starts with a mod-ern curriculum. All three phases of the agricultural education pro-fession; teachers, teacher educa-tors, and state supervisors; are re-sponsible for making certain this need is met. The curriculum must change with changes in agriculture practices, technology, and needs of the community. In my years in the profession I have seen chang-es in the profession accelerate at an alarming pace. My career has spanned the introduction of per-sonal computers in the classroom to global positioning devices de-termining the location and amount of fertilizer that is added to a fi eld.

Experiential learning has been the component that has separated agricultural education from other educational programs including most of the career and technical education areas. It is not enough for agricultural education students to learn the material in the class-room/laboratory, they apply these principles/concepts in personal situations through their supervised agricultural experience programs. By taking the knowledge to the

application level students develop a deeper understanding of the sub-jects and retention of the knowl-edge is vastly improved.

Agricultural education pro-grams are known for their vast number of laboratories ranging from school farms to biotechnol-ogy laboratories. The kinesthetic learning (hands-on) that occurs in these laboratories also assist in the development of a deeper under-standing of the subjects and im-proves the retention of the knowl-edge.

Agricultural education was built on the concept of problem solving instruction. That is one uses real problems to teach the ag-riculture concepts. Problem solv-ing in agricultural education can be traced to John Dewey, W. F. Stewart, Carsie Hammonds, Al-fred Krebs, Harold Binkley, John Crunkilton, Rodney Tulloch, L. H. Newcomb, Robert Warmbrod, and David McCracken to name a few. Problem solving instruction requires in-depth understanding of the topic in order to “solve” the problem. Students develop higher order thinking skills. I am begin-

continued on page 24

3September October 2015

SubscriptionsSubscription price for The Agricultural Education Magazine is $15.00 per year. Foreign subscriptions are $25.00 (U.S. currency) per year for surface mail, and $40 (U.S. currency) foreign airmail (except Canada). Orders must be for one year or longer. We can accept up to a three year subscription. Refunds are not available. Please allow 4 - 6 weeks delivery of fi rst magazine. Claims for missing issues cannot be honored after three months from date of publication, six months for foreign subscriptions. Single copies and back issues less than 10 years old are available at $5 each ($10.00 foreign mail). All back issues are available on microfi lm from UMI University Microfi lms, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. UMI University Microfi lms telephone number is (313) 761-4700. In submitting a subscription, designate new or renewal and provide mailing address including ZIP code. Send all subscriptions and requests for hard copy back issues to the Business Manager: Jay Jackman, National Association of Agricultural Educators (NAAE) 300 Garrigus Building, 325 Cooper Drive, The University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40546-0215, Phone: (859) 257-2224, FAX: (859) 323-3919.E-mail: [email protected]

Article SubmissionArticles and photographs should be submitted to the Editor or Theme Editor. Items to be considered for publication should be submitted at least 90 days prior to the publica-tion date of the intended issue. All submissions will be acknowledged by the Theme Editor and/or the Editor. No items are returned unless accompanied by a written request. Articles should be approximately four double spaced pages in length (1500 words). Information about the author(s) should be included at the end of the article. Photos and/or drawings appropriate for the “theme issue” are welcomed. Photos/drawings should be submitted in an electronic format (jpg or tiff format preferred – minimum 300 dpi). Do not imbed photos/drawings in the Word document. A recent photograph (jpg or tiff format preferred– minimum 300 dpi) of all authors should accompany the article un-less photographs are on fi le with the Editor. Articles in the Magazine may be reproduced without permission but should be acknowledged.

EditorDr. Harry N. Boone, Jr., Professor, Agricultural and Extension Education, West Virginia University, PO Box 6108, 2058 Agricultural Sciences Building, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506, Phone (304) 293-5451, FAX: (304) 293-3752.

E-mail: [email protected]

Publication InformationThe Agricultural Education Magazine (ISSN 0732-4677), published bi-monthly, is the professional journal of agricultural education. The journal is published by The Agricultural Education Magazine, Inc. at 300 Garrigus Building, The University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40546-0215.

Periodicals Postage Paid at Lexington, Kentucky and at additional mailing offi ces.

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Agricultural Education Magazine, attn: Jay Jackman, 300 Garrigus Building, The University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40546-0215. Phone: (859) 257-2224, FAX: (859) 323-3919.

CONTENTS

Theme: State Supervisors and Teacher Educators Refl ecting on the Past While Looking to the Future

Editor Comments: Does Agricultural Education Have a Future? ....................................2 by Harry N. Boone, Jr.

Theme Articles:Refl ecting on Three Decades in State Leadership .............................4by Nancy J. Trivette

Some Things Never Change ..............................................................6by Karen C. Hutchison

Our History Doesn’t Matter Unless We Have a Future .....................9by Matt Chaliff

Food for Thought… Are We Still Providing Students with Life-long Knowledge and Skills? ....................................................12by Stacy A. Gartin

Refl ecting on the Past While Looking to the Future ........................15by James Knight

Trendy or New Teaching Aids in the Future will NOT Replace the Fundamentals of Good Teaching ...............................................18by John R. Crunkilton

Modern Day Interpersonal Skills in Agricultural Education ...........21by Taylor Cooper

How the Three Circle Model Develops 21st Century Skillsin Students ........................................................................................23by Erin Yoest and Miranda Kane

Statement of Ownership ...................................................................25

Cover: The Total Agricultural Education Program Model often referred to as the “Three Circle Model,” Back Photos: West Virginia University students participating in the Tagged to Teach Ag events in Washington, DC. Photos courtesy of Jessica Blythe.


THEME ARTICLE

Refl ecting on Three Decades in State Leadership

by Nancy J. Trivette

Fall always begins with excitement and anticipa-tion for the upcoming school year. As the air

cools, the leaves begin to fall and school buses travel the roads, I am reminded of my fi rst days on the job as state FFA staff in the fall of the early 80s. I could not wait to tackle the daily tasks that would impact our state’s agricultural edu-cation students, FFA members and agricultural education programs; often investing 10-12 hours a day. There were endless details to man-

age; all without the use of today’s smart phones, tablets, Internet, websites, creative software, and convenient apps.

The things I did not know eas-ily outweighed what I did know. Luckily, my agriculture back-ground and upbringing provided me a positive outlook, a solid work ethic and lots of ambition to take on the multitude of details re-quired of a state FFA program. I loved every aspect of my job and did not realize at fi rst that I was in a unique role and position for

a female. I soon noticed that I was often the only female among the group of national agricultural education/FFA conference attend-ees. I recall one conference photo where I was the only female in the group of 100+ state staff in front of the National FFA Center in Al-exandria, VA. I was one of the youngest, if not the youngest, state staff member in the country at that time. This was all very clear as I sat in a conference room full of men, many with more years of experience than I had been alive. For several years, the comments from the podium began, “Good

morning gentlemen” and some-times would include a gender spe-cifi c joke not complimentary to fe-males. Eventually, the trend began to change and opening comments were more inclusive. Being one of a few females at the state level in those years afforded me outstand-ing opportunities to begin my ca-reer. I quickly invested my time in many excellent career and techni-cal and agricultural education pro-fessional development activities at the state and national levels.

Fifteen years fl ew by before my transition to New Jersey’s State Supervisor. Now, three de-cades of state leadership later, I continue to experience outstand-ing professional development op-portunities and can now refl ect on how far we have come. We have seen a variety of impactful state and national initiatives, as well as a healthy transition to a better balance of females in state staff and in teaching positions over the years. Unfortunately this gender balance at the state level has not led to a balance in cultural diver-sity among state staff positions.

Agricultural education profes-sional development opportunities have connected me to a nation-wide network of professionals in career and technical education. My early mentors introduced me to our state and national profes-sional organizations and highly encouraged my membership in each. I became a member of New Jersey Association of Agricultural Educators (NJAAE), National As-sociation of Agricultural Educa-tors (NAAE), Career and Techni-cal Education Association of New Jersey (CTEANJ), Association for Career and Technical Educa-tion (ACTE), FFA Alumni Asso-ciation, New Jersey Farm Bureau, and the list continued to grow over the years. All of these pro-fessional organizations have deep-ened my knowledge, appreciation, experience and ability to deliver quality programs for New Jersey.

We all need to be diligent in all aspects of agricultural education to prepare students for future careers in an ever changing agricultural industry fi lled with science, technology, engi-neering and math.


Today, my message to early ca-reer educators is consistent with my mentors’ advice 30 years ago, “Become members of your pro-fessional organizations. It is your duty as a professional. You will benefi t personally and profession-ally and agricultural education will prosper!”

There have been many initia-tives over the past three decades that have had impact on agricul-tural education including, but not limited to, the 1983 “A Nation at Risk” education movement which emphasized more science in agri-cultural education. Efforts to in-crease the integration and/or rec-ognition of science in agriculture continue today.

Other major initiatives im-pacting work at the state level, especially in New Jersey, included Re-Invent Agricultural Education for the Year 2020. This grassroots effort helped communicate New Jersey’s need for state leadership and led to the establishment of the Offi ce of Agricultural Education in the New Jersey Department of Agriculture to administer our state agricultural education program. As a result, the offi ce continues to have three staff (state supervisor, FFA specialist, and conference/fi s-cal coordinator) and operates with support of and in co-operation with the New Jersey Department of Education.

The National Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources Ca-reer Cluster Content Standards and the National Quality Program Standards initiatives, as well as their respective revisions, helped to advance agricultural educa-

tion over the years. H o w e v e r the na-tional pro-gram that has had the g r e a t e s t impact, in my opin-ion, in our state and nation is the Cur-riculum for Agricultur-al Science Education ( C A S E ) M o d e l Project. As with any new initia-tive there were doubters and lots of questions. Now after seven years and over 1,100 teachers from 40 states certifi ed, it is easy to see the value and positive im-pact that CASE, an academically/STEM based program, is having on schools, teachers and students. I am convinced that there would be fewer agricultural education programs in New Jersey and may-be other states too, thus fewer FFA members, if not for CASE. Half of New Jersey’s agriculture teachers are implementing CASE courses; many have multiple CASE certifi -cations and one instructor is certi-fi ed in seven CASE courses. The professional development compo-nent of CASE is strong and pro-vides consistent support to teach-ers. It has had a greater impact on our teachers in New Jersey than any other initiative I have expe-rienced in over 30 years. Teach-ers learn and understand the phi-

losophy of CASE, utilize inquiry based/project based education as well as learn how to deliver each lesson, lab and course by using equipment and experiencing the course just as their students will.

I often get calls and emails from teachers before they return home from a CASE Institute about getting certifi ed in more CASE courses. The teachers report that they see great value in the CASE

Nancy J. Trivette is the New Jersey Agricultural Education Program Leader/State CASE Leader/State FFA Advisor for the New Jersey Depart-ment of Agriculture, Offi ce of Agri-cultural Education.

Laboratory activities are vital to a successful agricultural education program. (Photo courtesy of Stacy A. Gartin)

continued on page 8


THEME ARTICLE

Some Things Never Changeby Karen C. Hutchison

It is an exciting time to be in agricultural education. One feeling that has stayed the same for me during my 36

years in agricultural education is that it is an exciting time to be a part of this profession. During those 36 years I have enjoyed 13 years teaching, 22 years as State Supervisor and FFA Advisor, and now as an LPS Specialist for Na-tional FFA. One of the most excit-

ing periods was during the time I served as the State Supervisor and FFA Advisor in Delaware. During this time I saw changing demo-graphics, curriculum focus, and technology.

I began serving as the State Supervisor for Agriculture at the Delaware Department of Educa-tion in September of 1992. When I arrived at my fi rst NASAE con-ference that fall I found I was in a very unique position: I was young and female serving in a state su-pervisor position. All of my coun-terparts were male and many were 20 years older. Though there were a few female Executive Secretar-ies there were no female State Supervisors. It was a very intimi-

dating conference for me. I still clearly remember Dr. Larry Case telling me to hang in there, which I obviously did with his support and the support of many others. During my time as State Supervi-sor I saw the fi rst female elected to the FFA Board of Directors (Be-linda Chason) as well as women elected into the NASAE leader-ship. Today the number of female State Supervisors and Executive Secretaries continues to grow.

It has not only been in the leadership realm that I have seen changes; one just needs to look at those attending NAAE or AAAE conferences and meetings to know that the number of females has grown throughout the profes-sion. In Delaware over 50% of the teachers are female and have been for a few years. In many universities the agriculture edu-cation majors are predominately female. During my years in ag-riculture education the discussion has changed from how to attract more females into the classrooms to how do we make sure the class-rooms are refl ective of the schools population. Many state offi cer teams are now majority female and many struggle with how to get

males interested and motivated to take on leadership roles. The one question that has stayed the same though is how we attract a more diverse student and teacher popu-lation.

Just as agriculture has changed so has the agriculture classroom. In the fall of 2001, through funding provided by the US Department of Education for all career and tech-nical education areas, a group of agriculture educators came to-gether to begin the work on agri-culture career cluster knowledge and skill statements for the Ag-riculture, Food, and Natural Re-sources (AFNR) pathways. The work helped defi ne what students needed to know upon the com-pletion of a pathway. This work changed and broadened the fo-cus of agriculture education from mostly production agriculture to the science and systems of agricul-ture including areas such as food, environmental, natural resources, plant, animal, power, structural, technical, and agribusiness sys-tems. Since that time, curriculum standards have been developed and revised including the addition of biotechnology to the pathway list. Activities at the National FFA also changed to refl ect the chang-ing classroom instruction. The Agriscience Fair was added while other Career Development Events and profi ciencies were revised to refl ect the changing industry stu-dents are being prepared for.

Even though I have seen major changes in the demographics of

Much has changed during my career yet the important things have not. So, for me, it is still an exciting time to be involved in agricul-ture education!


the profession and the curriculum focus the greatest change would be in technology; the rapidity in which it is changing as well as the increase of available resources. In September 1992 I left the class-room to take a job at the Delaware Department of Public Instruction (now the Department of Educa-tion) as the State Supervisor for Agriculture. When I walked into my offi ce I had a desk with all the basic offi ce supplies and a phone; no computer and no cell phone. It took a few weeks to convince those I worked for that I needed a com-puter. At that time all communi-cations with teachers was written, typed by the secretary, and then mailed since many teachers did not have access to computers ei-ther. If teachers did have comput-ers it usually was just one for their use not the students. Gradually we moved to all communication taking place electronically. More importantly the computer had be-come a common tool for use in the classroom by students.

When computers started to be-come more common in the class-room, it was usually through a few placed along the walls of the class-room. During my years as State Supervisor I saw the addition of shared computer labs in the Career and Technical area become a com-mon aspect of school renovations. Over the last few years the use of laptop carts became more popular enabling students to take the com-puter with them as they worked in the greenhouse, animal lab and barn, food science lab, or into the classroom for research. Now some schools are assigning iPads instead of textbooks to students as

more curriculum is avail-able online.

Computers are not the only technology that has changed the class-room. As many of our classrooms became more math and science focused, teachers were trained on how the graphing calcula-tor could be used within the agriculture classroom for conducting research and charting results. This created a need for differ-ent types of professional development so teachers can stay current. Other technologies teachers have had to keep up with include Whiteboards (ini-tially) and now interactive smart boards. I remember my college technology training on using a video record-er, overhead projector, and how to thread a fi lm projector! Now teacher preparation focuses less on learning how to use the equip-ment (or hardware) but on using the numerous resources available such as YouTube, Kahoot!, Black-board, Google on Air just to name few.

What would we do today without cell phones? My fi rst cell phone in the early 90’s was a bag phone; only good for making and receiving calls! Now I use my cell/smart phone to check and send emails, provide directions to wherever I may be traveling, checking the weather, staying cur-rent on the news, taking photos, reading a book, listening to music, checking my calendar, keeping

track of my contacts, checking in for fl ights, staying connected with friends and colleagues through Facebook or LinkedIn, tracking events such as the National FFA Convention and even making and receiving calls! All this technol-ogy has created endless opportu-nities as well as challenges.

Technology has also increased the availability of information to students and teachers. No longer is it just text and resource books but the entire Internet at every-one’s fi ngertips. Even though this has made more information avail-able and current it has also created a challenge in determining what is reliable. Many people jokingly state, “If it’s on the Internet it must be true” but how do you teach stu-dents how to differentiate what is fact and what is opinion? How do

Technology takes many forms in the agricul-tural education classroom/laboratory. (Pho-to courtesy of Stacy A. Gartin)


Model for personal professional development, as a method to up-date their facility and equipment as well as a way to assess students’ skills, knowledge and competen-cies using the CASE national as-sessments. The fact that Rutgers University and Delaware Valley University, along with other post-secondary institutions in our re-gion offer college credit for CASE courses further validates the value of the program.

The future success of Ag-ricultural Education lies with initiatives like CASE that con-nect instruction with current and emerging industry needs. Success will continue to be realized with efforts like CASE because busi-ness and industry is involved in the development of courses and

educational resources thus keep-ing CASE relevant to educational and industry needs. Connecting students to skills, knowledge and competencies necessary for suc-cessful careers in the broad in-dustry of agriculture is critical, especially if we are to meet global industry employment demands.

FFA will also be an important part of agricultural education’s fu-ture. FFA members are known for their excellent leadership skills and will continue to be in demand to fi ll the gap in agricultural ca-reer openings. FFA’s continual adjustment of its programs and offerings will help make students ‘career ready’ for the 21st century. Continual focus on global agricul-tural issues will be important as our population exceeds 9 billion

people over the next few decades. Great strides have been made by FFA over the last 30 years to keep FFA on the forefront of change; however we must not lose our fo-cus and continue to make changes for emerging agricultural careers, global issues and the develop-ment of premier leaders. This may include the need to curtail some ‘old favorite’ FFA events to make room for events meeting emerging needs and employment demands. We all need to be diligent in all as-pects of agricultural education to prepare students for future careers in an ever changing agricultural industry fi lled with science, tech-nology, engineering and math.

Refl ecting on Three Decades...(continued from page 5)

you explain that Wikipedia should not be your only source for a re-port but that you need to verify the information since anyone can add to it? What are the reliable sources?

We now have agriculture classes available online for stu-dents who do not have access to programs in their school. How will that change classroom instruc-tion? Students and teachers now have incredible resources avail-able to them on the National FFA and NAAE websites, not through VHS tapes, “fl oppy” discs, or even CDs. Students can watch videos on career opportunities and see stories about what other agri-

culture students across the coun-try are working on. Teachers can reach out beyond their own state to teachers across the country for help and suggestions. The infor-mation and technology are chang-ing so rapidly that it is sometimes diffi cult to keep up and not feel overwhelmed.

Much has changed during my career yet the important things have not. The agriculture educa-tion community is a great one to be involved in and always has been; the three component model is as relevant today as it was when agriculture education began; and agriculture educators are passion-ate about what they do, the stu-

Dr. Karen C. Hutchison, former Education Associate for Agri-science with the Delaware De-partment of Education is currently serving as a LPS Specialist with the National FFA Organization.

dents and people they work with as well as the future of agriculture. So, for me, it is still an exciting time to be involved in agriculture education!


THEME ARTICLE

Our History Doesn’t Matter Unless We Have a Future

by Matt Chaliff

Over the past several years I have had some unique opportuni-ties to interact with

the history of agricultural edu-cation and FFA in Kentucky. A folder of black and white photos led to lunch with a past state staff member. A call from a retired ag teacher led to a binder full of ar-tifacts from the 1920s. A special recognition for past national FFA offi cers led to sitting at a kitchen table with the daughter of a past national offi cer looking through his scrapbook from the late 1930s. These have been some wonderful experiences for a self-proclaimed history buff.

There is no question that ag-ricultural education and FFA have a rich history. In addition to the facts that all freshmen learn, there are untold volumes of stories about the impact of our profession over the past nine decades. I re-cently ran across the quote, “Your history doesn’t matter unless you have a future,” and I was struck by how applicable that is to agricul-tural education and FFA. Unless our classrooms are full of young people excited to be learning about agriculture, the fact that E. M. Tif-fany wrote the FFA Creed really doesn’t make any difference.

The Past

When I entered agricultural education as a student in the fall of 1993 Kentucky had just made

the move away from Ag I, Ag II, Ag III, and Ag IV to a broader spectrum of courses. Horticul-ture was a new offering for most schools and the greenhouses at Rockcastle County High School were still new and fresh. Of the six FFA offi cers my freshman year, all six were male and all six

lived on farms. While I heard the term “SAE” mentioned “farming program” was the more common term for experiential learning.

While I was attending college, the Kentucky Occupational Skill Standards were introduced for ag-riculture and these were rolled out at the fi rst Teachers Conference I attended. Older teachers believed these standards were the State Di-rector’s way of getting rid of ag-riculture programs and did their best to pass the fear on to younger teachers.

When I began teaching in July 2000, the state offi ce gave teachers an option of whether to received electronic messages or paper mail-ings. In 2004, Kentucky received a grant to develop a computerized

curriculum resource known as the CAERT CD. This included work-sheets, PowerPoints, and even the ability to give tests online; all fair-ly modern concepts in 2004.

One of my fi rst jobs after com-ing to the state offi ce was to update the Kentucky FFA website. At that time, the website was stored on a

3.5 inch fl oppy disk and updating it was an all day job for a trained professional. Facebook and You-Tube were founded around the time I moved to the state level but it was three or four years before we realized they could be great tools for promoting agricultural education and FFA. I inherited a 35 mm camera and several rolls of fi lm from my predecessor as well as some State Fair photos that needed to be mailed out.

During my early years as a member of state staff, a new proj-ect called the CASE Curriculum became a hot topic at national meetings. The shortage of agri-culture teachers was a constant topic of discussion that morphed into the Teach Ag Campaign. Na-tional standards for curriculum

The investments we make today in recruit-ing and training teachers, sharing the story of agricultural education, and keeping our pro-grams up to date will determine everything that happens in the years ahead.


and program evaluation were dis-cussed, discussed some more, and eventually adopted.

The Present

Today, Kentucky offers seven career pathways and much of the growth in agricultural education has been the result of new courses such as Floral Design and Small Animal Technology. Greenhous-es are as common as ag shops in Kentucky and there are as many agriculture programs with micro-scopes as pipe benders. Across Kentucky, more females serve as chapter, regional, and state of-fi cers than males and fewer and fewer of them come from a farm background. Service learning and research based SAE programs have taken their place alongside

more traditional entrepre-neurship and placement projects.

The dreaded Kentucky Occupational Skill Stan-dard Assessments are still in place and are now part of state accountability for College and Career Readi-ness. Instead of closing agriculture programs, this has actually helped add new programs across the state; three this year alone. These standards are driv-ing what is taught in lo-cal programs and helping connect local teachers with the needs of business and industry.

The CAERT CD has given way to a number of online resources. In-stead of developing re-source binders or CDs we

now post all of our resources on the NAAE Communities of Prac-tice page. Local teachers are us-ing Pinterest and Prezi to spice up what is taught at the local level and Skype to bring in guest speak-ers from around the world. The cell phones that I fought against as a new teacher are now being used during class time to look up infor-mation on projects.

Our FFA website has come a long way since the days of the fl oppy disk. Today multiple peo-ple can update the site from mul-tiple locations using any wireless device. If the newly elected state offi cers are not posted on the site the day after Convention, folks think we are behind the times. Today Kentucky FFA has a You-

Tube account in addition to Face-book, Twitter, and Instagram. We can communicate with thousands of FFA members directly and in-stantly.

Dozens of Kentucky teach-ers have been trained in the use of the CASE curriculum and it has helped them move classroom teaching forward in our state. The Teach Ag Campaign has grown from an afterthought to a major focus for all of Team Ag Ed. The National AFNR standards and Na-tional Program Quality Standards are still around and are actually ready to be revised.

The Future

As noted above, our past and even our present mean little unless we have a future and that future is in our hands.

The future for agricultural ed-ucation and FFA seems as bright today as at any time in the last 20 years. The challenge of feeding 9 billion people is driving interest in agriculture and agriculture re-lated careers to new levels. FFA membership is at record levels and all kinds of participation numbers continue to grow. Still, there are many issues facing our profession that must be dealt with in the com-ing years to ensure a bright future.

The agriculture industry con-tinues to grow and change and we have to be willing to grow and change with it. We have to fi gure out how to keep our teachers up to date and our curriculum relevant in a time of constant change. We have to have some hard conversa-tions about what we are teaching

Competitions such as the Career Develop-ment Events allow students to demonstrate the knowledge learned in the classroom. (Photo courtesy of Stacy A. Gartin)


Matt Chaliff is the Executive Sec-retary for the Kentucky FFA As-sociation. He is also the Eastern Region Vice President for the Na-tional Association of State Super-visors of Agricultural Education.

and why. In a day and age when drones are being used on farms and cattle are being given elec-tronic ear tags, we are still restor-ing Farmall H tractors and teach-ing about Belted Galloway cows. A growing number of our students will work overseas at some point in their careers. We must teach them appreciation for other cul-tures and help them learn to adapt to new and changing situations.

Data collection, analysis, and use must become a bigger part of agricultural education in the com-ing decades. Collecting quality data at the local, state, and national levels must become a priority and we must learn to use this data in making decisions and promoting the work that we do. If data shows that our students are not perform-ing, we have to fi gure out why and work to fi x the issue. We can no longer afford to ignore data that we don’t like. Anyone who has been in agricultural education for 15 minutes can tell you a great sto-ry about someone whose life was forever changed through our pro-gram. Unfortunately, policy mak-ers don’t care as much about our great stories as they do the number of students who are enrolled and achieving academic and technical benchmarks.

As the American population becomes more and more removed

from the farm and a rural lifestyle in general, we must step up our efforts at advocacy and public relations. We can never assume that anyone knows who we are and what we do. Experience has taught me that even in rural com-munities, people assume that ag-ricultural education and FFA are exactly what they were when they were in school 10, 20, or 50 years ago. The burden of proof for our relevance will be on our profession and this becomes more true with every passing year. We cannot af-ford to assume that school board members, administrators, and leg-islators know what we do and why that is important. We have to tell them in purposeful and effective ways on an ongoing basis.

No challenge is greater than that of providing quality agricul-ture teachers for every agricultural education program in the nation. Our efforts to recruit teachers, train teachers, and keep teachers is the single most important piece of ensuring that we have a future. Local agricultural education pro-grams are never more than one bad agriculture teacher away from being closed down. We don’t just need people to fi ll spots; we need quality individuals who can lead programs forward. We cannot de-pend on these quality individuals to just appear, we must recruit and

train them with purpose and inten-sity. The future is simply not pos-sible without them.

The future of agricultural edu-cation is truly in our hands. The investments we make today in recruiting and training teachers, sharing the story of agricultural education, using data to drive de-cisions, and keeping our programs up to date will determine every-thing that happens in the years ahead. The future of agricultural education, in fact whether there is a future, depends on us. For the sake of all our wonderful past his-tory, I pray that we take this chal-lenge seriously and do all we can to ensure that agricultural educa-tion does have a future.

Agriculture is our wisest pursuit, because it will in the end contribute most to real wealth, good morals, and happiness. Thomas Jefferson


THEME ARTICLE

Food for Thought… Are We Still Providing Students with Life-long Knowledge and Skills?

by Stacy A. Gartin

Do you have IT?” “DO YOU HAVE IT?” IT is hard to describe or defi ne, but if you have

IT, people will trust in you, be-lieve in you, and will follow you. Do your students think you have IT? I believe during a teacher’s initial employment most of them have IT. However, it does seem like many teachers lose their IT. My perception is that allowing students who do not have a career aspiration related to agriculture

into your classes, part-time em-ployment, farming, and coaching hinders a teacher’s IT. One needs to ask, what do I need to change in my life to get my IT back. I have witnessed over the past 40 years that those teachers who have IT make a difference in the lives of their students, their program, and their community. These same teachers have an active advisory committee and understand the im-portance of providing adult edu-cation related to agriculture and natural resources.

When I taught secondary ag-riculture, I had a community ad-visory committee to serve as part of a check and balance system to make sure I was meeting the edu-cational needs and expectations of the community. The commit-tee was made up of a magical blend of gender, age and culture. I maintain that the vested interest of that group of individuals has had a major impact not only on that high school agriculture program, but on my professional life. Their commitment and dedication was always measured by their will-

ingness to go the extra mile. The state expectation was that an ad-visory committee should meet at least three times per year. How-ever, these individuals were pro-fessionals. They didn’t just want to be participants. Thus, we met monthly and maintained a pro-active approach to moving the day program and our young and adult farmer program forward.

Michael Murray once said, “leaders are those who dare to dream dreams and have visions and then can communicate those

dreams and visions to others in such a way that they say Yes.” What are we saying YES to? We are saying “yes” to doing our part in providing our students with life-long technical agriculture knowledge and skills. This author maintains that the greatest chal-lenge facing America in the next 25 years will be a lack of skilled laborers. If secondary agriculture programs don’t help produce this skilled laborers, who else will. Thus, all the more reason to make sure high school students have high quality supervised agricul-tural experience programs (SAE). According to Merle “Dutch” Car-win, my high school ag teacher and author of the Supervised Oc-cupational Experience Manual, he notes that the SAE should be related to the career path of the student, be challenging, and of enough size and scope to earn re-spect. Carwin also noted that the SAE should grow and expand in order to refl ect real-life situations. Currently the fi rst obvious prob-lem I see is that our students are engaged in more short term, 4-H type projects. I see students earn-ing their American FFA Degree from selling show/fair type ani-mals and value added products at unrealistic prices. I think the pro-fession has lost sight of the intent of the SAEP. Remember the “P” stands for “Program” not “Proj-ect.” The second problem that is evident is that ag teachers are not supervising their students often enough. Teacher supervision of a

The time is now for teachers of agricultur-al education to “over-haul” the way they are training agricultural students to become lead-ers. Teachers need to rethink how to better en-gage the active participation of the members.


student’s SAE is a motivator to the student and allows the teacher to being real-life examples into the classroom. Let us not forget that the supervision of a student’s SAE whether it be entrepreneurship, placement, research, or explor-atory is vitally important to moti-vating the student to expand his/her SAE in size and scope. These experiences are important for a student to have in his/her tool box for the rest of his/her life.

It has been said that “on the Way to the Future there will be Drivers, Riders and Roadkill.” Guess who you are? You are the “Driver!” It is obvious that the success of your students and your program is dependent upon you performing your job to the very best of your ability whether you are 21 or 61. You are the “Driv-ers” because you are agricultural leader who should be committed to making a positive difference in the lives of the students whom you teach. I am concerned that teach-ers have bought into the philoso-phy that all kids should go to col-lege. This author would maintain that nearly 20% of the students attending college don’t belong there for whatever reason; matu-rity, lack of career direction, or academic preparation. For those students who don’t attend college and even those who do, this author would maintain they do not have adequate “tools in their personal tool box.”

I visit with college students across the country who desire to become ag teachers and they can’t weld, can’t read a ruler, don’t know mechanical tools or

how to use them correctly. They don’t know breeds of animals, characteristics of animal diseases and how to treat them. They have an extremely weak knowledge of small engines, animal nutrition, genetics, wildlife, economics, and marketing. They are weak in identifying fl owers, trees, insects, grasses, and production crops. Agricultural education curriculum at the secondary level has always been based on science, yet our stu-dents still lack basic agricultural knowledge and skills. The tools in their tool box should be life-long skills which should be valuable in assisting them in obtaining a good job or in pursuing further educa-tion. In the recent October GOP debate Senator Marco Rubio stat-ed, “We need to get back to train-ing people in this country to do the jobs of the 21st century.” Why for the life of me, I do not understand why did we stop doing vocational education in America, people that

can work with their hands; people you can train to do this work while they’re still in high school so they can graduate ready to go to work.

This author’s undergraduate advisor, Dr. Ramsey Groves at Colorado State University, always said, “if the student hasn’t learned, the teacher hasn’t taught.” Ini-tially I thought he was incorrect in that you can’t “make students learn” if they don’t want to learn. However, I was wrong. What Dr. Groves was really saying is that all students will learn if the teacher employs appropriate types of motivation and teaching strate-gies. I would hope that teachers realize that one size does not fi t all. So, why are we buying into pre-planned curricula. Are teach-ers incapable of designing lesson plans which stimulate learning, utilizing the problem solving ap-proach to facilitate learning, ex-pecting critical thinking, and take-ing learning to the doing stage?

Teachers of agricultural education owe it to all their students to equip them with the best tools possible in order to be successful.


With the development of the global market place the need for high quality leadership is more critical now than ever before. This author believes that in the near future the preparation of individu-als to help lead the agricultural industry may be as important as the production of food and fi ber. Traditionally, students of agri-cultural education have acquired leadership traits by participating in contests, conventions, hands-on training and school and communi-ty service activities. It is believed that these activities motivate dues paying members and help them develop into leaders and produc-tive citizens of society. This au-thor would question whether this traditional approach to teaching leadership and developing leaders is satisfactory for the 21st century and beyond.

One of the greatest challenges is to motivate our students to be the best that they can be. This is not a simple task. Creating an en-vironment in which people feel good about themselves and their contributions is still a major prob-lem. The climate should foster innovation and creativity. The air should be fi lled with genuine en-thusiasm for individual as well as group goals. The clarity of verbal and nonverbal messages, listen-ing, and feedback have a major impact on the entire communica-tion process between and among members.

Yes, these human models not only have different exteriors and interiors, but they also have dif-ferent "fuel" requirements.” The "fuel" requirements which keep

students actively participating come in the form of reinforcement and rewards. Teachers of agricul-tural education need to be aware that individuals with different per-sonality types will require rein-forcement or reward specifi cally tailored to meet his/her individual needs.

The time is now for teachers of agricultural education to "'over-haul" the way they are training ag-ricultural students to become lead-ers. Teachers need to be rethinking how to better engage the active participation of the new members. Are they provided with multiple opportunities to be actively in-volved or are they expected to be bored by sitting on the sideline as an observed and not a player. Edu-cating students to become leaders is similar to training teams for ca-reer development events (CDEs). Teachers wouldn't expect students to be successful in career develop-ment events if they weren't prop-erly prepared. Likewise, teachers can't expect students to become leaders if they haven't received the necessary prerequisites. Fur-thermore, CDEs don’t really teach leadership as they are the appli-cation of technical agricultural knowledge. I think we are only kidding ourselves if we think dif-ferently. I think the best we can hang our hat on is that they gain self-confi dence and maybe some speaking skills.

The changing world in which we live demands more knowl-edgeable individuals with better leadership skills. Teachers of ag-ricultural education owe it to all their students to equip them with

Dr. Stacy A. Gartin is a Profes-sor of Agricultural and Extension Education at West Virginia Uni-versity and a WVU Foundation Outstanding Teacher.

the best tools possible in order to be successful. This concept is vital if we subscribe to what Tom Hen-nesy, 1990 Chairman of the Na-tional FFA Foundation, said, "Our product is a highly motivated, in-dustrious young American who is self-confi dent, self-reliant, and self respecting. Through FFA we are providing a cadre of bright and capable young people with good moral values and common sense. From them let our future leaders be chosen" (National FFA Foun-dation Report, 1990, p. 7).

“Now is the Time, This is the Place and You are the Person.” Yes, you are the person. You are the person who has the challenge of making all of your students productive citizens of society by giving them the academic tools to be successful regardless of ca-reer path. America needs you and America needs your highly skilled and knowledgeable students of agriculture.


THEME ARTICLE

Refl ecting on the Past While Looking to the Future

by James Knight

Refl ections on the Past:

Growing up on a small dryland farm in northeastern Colorado

was idyllic. I loved everything connected with that experience and when I was nine years old, I joined a 4-H club that further ce-mented my love for the farm and the life style that came with it. By the time I started high school, I al-ready knew that I wanted to spend my life somewhere in the agricul-tural industry and enrolling in the vocational agriculture program was a “given.” Fortunately, the teacher in the program was terrifi c and he helped me fi nd my way. He encouraged the development of my supervised farming pro-gram and involvement in the FFA. What a great experience that was!

Initially, I wasn’t sure about my major as an undergraduate but soon realized that teaching vocational agriculture would be a good career fi t for me. After graduation from Colorado State University, I taught vocational ag-riculture for six years and loved every minute of that time in my life. With the encouragement of a mentor, I went back to College where I earned the doctorate in Agricultural Education from The Ohio State University and became a faculty member there. After 13 years at Ohio State, I transitioned to live in Arizona and spent 8 years working as an educational

consultant. Then I returned to be a teacher educator in Agricultural Education at the University of Ari-zona where I retired after 18 years on July 1, 2014.

During the years of my ex-perience with agricultural educa-tion, I have watched it evolve into the program that exists today. It

has been interesting to watch the name change with the times. Go-ing from vocational agriculture to agricultural education with a num-ber of different areas of focus over the years all occurred while I was in the profession and not without some controversy along the way.

I was present at the National FFA Convention as a voting del-egate for Colorado when the NFA was merged into the FFA. Then as a young vocational agriculture teacher when girls were offi cially admitted into the organization, I actively sought boys AND girls for my high school program. As I refl ect back on those changes, I have come to believe that the ag-ricultural education program as we know it today would not have occurred without those changes. The program was no longer just for rural white boys but became

available to both boys and girls in all kinds of settings.

By the time I was a young faculty member at Ohio State, the “overhaul” of the technical side of agricultural education programs had begun and was in full force pri-marily as a result of the vocational education acts that were enacted at

the federal level. This led to some major expansion of the defi nition of agriculture to include technical areas beyond farming and ranch-ing. As a result, many specialized programs were created across the country. We also began to value the notion that the program was a “science” based program because of the nature of the technologies in the agricultural industry.

During that same time, the no-tion of “vocational,” which tend-ed to have a negative stigma at-tached, pushed the name changes that followed. As each of those changes came to the profession of agricultural education, there was more than a little debate about them. In fact, it seems to me that many of those issues still fi nd their way into the discussions that oc-cur today.

Agricultural education instructional pro-grams will continue and be an even more im-portant part of the educational mission for this country in the future!


In retrospect, it seems to me that sometimes the agricultural education profession was too slow to make some of the changes that needed to occur to keep the in-structional programs relevant. At the same time, I believe that the profession was also too quick to adopt some of the changes be-cause they saw a fi nancial boost for those instructional programs. As a member of the profession for over 45 years, I’m sure that I have been complicit in both cases.

Current Observations:

One area of the program that has been of concern to me is what I would call “the boy crisis.” I was active as a high school teacher and later as a teacher educator in seek-ing ways to open the doors for girls to enter the program. Of course, a major tool in that process was the FFA. What concerns me now is that the boys seem to be retreating from involvement in the program and in the FFA. Since girls gener-

ally mature faster than boys, they are often more ca-pable than boys the same age, especially when con-s i d e r i n g the “lead-e r s h i p ” types of a c t i v i -ties made ava i lab le in agricul-tural edu-cation and

FFA programs. No doubt this comment may cause some to stir and even for some to be offended but it seems worth mentioning. Note that this year’s National FFA Offi cer Team includes fi ve young women and one young man. This is not a new trend.

In terms of the agricultural education programs, I believe that the profession has gotten more right answers than wrong. We have deep roots in the notion of “problem solving,” which is now coming into vogue in other areas of education. The idea of mak-ing instruction relevant for the students and to have them gain “hands on” experiences are “bed-rock” in our profession. Our gen-eral commitment to a pragmatic philosophy has been important to the stability and acceptance of our instructional programs across the country. This approach to instruc-tion is the envy of many other in-structional program areas. In fact,

it seems to me that agricultural education is the “best kept secret” in the educational arena.

One of the most obvious and clearly successful efforts in the agricultural education profession has been the development and growth of the FFA. I’m aware of the skeptics’ comments about the “tail wagging the dog” but I don’t think that view holds much water. From an instructional perspective, just consider the growth and the nature of the activities and initia-tives that have come out of the FFA. It seems to me it is one of the most, if not the most, productive and positive area that has grown out of the agricultural education profession. Just go to a state or the national convention and feel the energy that emerges from the participants in attendance. I feel very confi dent that the capacity to raise fi nancial support for the organization is directly linked to that energy. Business and industry sponsors recognize it and are com-mitted to supporting it. Being as-sociated with the FFA is a GOOD thing in their eyes and we as a pro-fession should capitalize on that in every way possible.

Of course, getting and keeping high quality agricultural instruc-tors for the instructional programs in public schools continues to be a serious and nagging issue. In fact, that was even the issue I ad-dressed in my doctoral disserta-tion in 1977. A number of activi-ties have been attempted to deal with this issue but as far as I am aware those have only met with marginal success.

From an instructional perspective, consider the growth and the nature of the activities and initiatives that have come out of the FFA. (Photo courtesy of Stacy Gartin.)


What about the Future?

Since I’m not a futurist and don’t have a crystal ball, I’m not sure how well I can see into the future. In fact, I doubt that many people actually can predict the future with much degree of ac-curacy. However, I do have some thoughts about where I believe the profession can and should be headed in the future. As I have refl ected on the agricultural edu-cation program over my involve-ment from a beginning student in 1960 until now, which is 55 years of contact, I am left to make the following observations:

The need for agricultural edu-cation at all levels needs to be sus-tained and expanded if possible. Obviously, we all rely upon an abundant and healthy supply of food in this culture and that will require lots of trained and edu-cated people up and down the pro-duction chain. Thus, the technical side of what we do in our instruc-tional programs will need to keep up with the times. For example, it is no longer a “sin,” as it once was, to graduate from a second-ary school agricultural science

program and then pursue a college degree in a related fi eld of interest. This means that teachers in the fi eld will need to keep up with the technical developments in agricul-ture. Lifelong learning is needed now more than ever in the past and with the kinds of scientifi c devel-opments in agriculture that seem to be coming out all of the time, teachers cannot be content with just a Bachelor’s degree. More will be needed.

I believe that the basic tenets that have sustained the agricultur-al education programs throughout the country for nearly a century need to be a part of our future. It seems to me that the three ring model continues to be relevant to our future because it is built upon principles rather than specifi c con-tent. Those principles have been successful for a long time and I don’t see any reason they won’t be just as important in the future. Being student centered and us-ing relevant, “hands-on” learn-ing works; and what would make us think that would change over time? Learning that comes from involvement and engagement is

Dr. James Knight is Professor Emeri-tus in the Department of Agricultural Education, The University of Arizona.

principle based as is the develop-ment of the “whole” person. Thus the use of the FFA as a tool to ac-complish many of the future goals is still pertinent.

Will things change in our in-structional programs in the future? Undoubtedly, they will. If, how-ever, we keep up with the times and hold on to the basic principles that have proven out over such a long time, the agricultural educa-tion instructional programs will continue and be an even more important part of the educational mission for this country in the fu-ture! How is that for a prediction?!

Fast food may appear to be cheap food and, in the literal sense it often is, but that is because huge social and environmental costs are being excluded from the calculations. Prince Charles


THEME ARTICLE

Trendy or New Teaching Aids in the Future will NOT Replace

the Fundamentals of Good Teachingby John R. Crunkilton

How many times have you heard a coach of a losing athletic team say; “We must return

to the fundamentals,” “We did not execute the basics,” or “We were not effective in implement-ing what we know to be sound practices.” These same questions could be posed when we as teach-ers feel that a class did not go well or the students did not achieve the lesson objectives.

As we look to the future and as I refl ect on what it is that leads to an effective agricultural educa-tion program and specifi cally to the learning environment, there are some basic fundamentals of the teaching-learning process that were stated years ago that still hold true today and will contin-ue to be applicable in the future. The purpose of this article is to highlight and remind us of sev-eral fundamentals of the teaching-learning process that have proven to be sound teaching-learning principles, either through proven

research or fi rst-hand experiences. Thus, I would return to Lancelot’s three principles of learning. Each will be stated with a brief discus-sion to follow.

Principle of Practice - The principle of practice is that a per-son learns what is practiced and continued practice or use is neces-sary for retaining what has been learned. It must be remembered that the practice is not a mere re-petitive activity, but educational practice must be a meaningful activity in which students are ac-

tively practicing sound, correct, and proper habits or skills. Also, at fi rst glance one might think this principle of learning applies only to psychomotor or manipulative skills, but this principle also ap-plies equally well to affective or cognitive skill development. The teacher must take on a quality control approach such that as the student practices, improvement of the skill should be measurable un-til such time the skill develops to the level that is acceptable.

Principle of Effect - The prin-ciple of effect implies that if stu-

dents are satisfi ed with a learning activity, it tends to promote further student learning and encourages further practice on the part of the student. Or it could be conversely stated, if a student is dissatisfi ed or annoyed with a learning activ-ity, it will stifl e effective learn-ing. Teaching-learning activities that will promote or encourage students to continue learning are those that include opportunities for students to experience approv-al, recognition, success, activity, ownership, confi dence, creativ-ity, service to others, and security. Further learning will be hampered when activities lead to disapprov-al, neglect, failure, inactivity, non-ownership, fear, self-centerness, and insecurity occurs.

Principle of Association - The principle of association implies that those experiences that fi rst oc-cur together tend to recur together. This principle requires that the teaching-learning process as well as content to be taught must be aligned or sequenced in the natu-ral way that people tend to learn; and that the content is presented as it appears in real life experiences and/or in the fi eld of agriculture. For example, teaching the correct steps to follow in planting a tree must mirror the correct steps that would be used by a landscaper in planting that tree. This principle would also include teaching stu-dents any theory as well as the practical aspects of tree planting;

Agricultural education instructional pro-grams will continue and be an even more im-portant part of the educational mission for this country in the future!


that is weaving the two together such that students can understand the relationship and value of un-derstanding theory and practice as a mutual event. And last, the teacher should generalize the cor-rect steps in planting a tree to the planting of any shrub.

To illustrate the importance of these three principles and how as a beginning teacher educator I failed to convey these principles of learning correctly to my stu-dents, I offer this example. At the time I began my career as a uni-versity professor, the overhead projector was becoming the “big thing” in teaching aids. Thus, in my method’s course, I encouraged students to use this new, innova-tive teaching aid. I soon learn that as I visited the student teachers, they were indeed using the over-head, but incorrectly. They were fl ipping the slides on the projector right and left and at a speed their students were soon left behind. Even worse were those overhead projectors that had a roll of fi lm on the side. The student teachers were preparing their class notes prior to class and once the class began, the student teachers were merrily on

their way spinning the roll of fi lm at neck break speed without any regard to involvement of the stu-dents. Fast forward this scene to several years ago when the Power-Point became the “in thing” to use in the classroom. Again, Power-Points allowed teachers to present information at a speed much faster than students could absorb. If the teacher was not careful, students were left aside and soon became spectators in the learning envi-ronment. These two examples illustrate that any trendy or new teaching aid or technique now or in the future will not replace the fundamentals of good teaching. Referring back to the principle of practice, incorrect use of overhead projectors and later to PowerPoint presentations can stifl e meaning-ful practice for the students; un-less the teacher purposely slows down to allow practice as part of the daily lesson. For the principle of effect, misuse of the overhead projector or power point presenta-tions soon left a bad taste in the mouth of students. If the teacher did not plan accordingly, students felt neglected, were inactive, ex-posed to dull teaching, and in gen-

eral, this situation led to poor per-formance on tests, all illustrating the importance of this principle of learning. For the principle of as-sociation, it is true with proper pri-or preparation of a transparency or power point, the sequence of an instructional topic or curriculum content can be assured. But what can be overlooked if the teacher does not purposely plan is on-the-spot teacher input and dialog, stu-dent input and dialog, and an over-all group and shared effort in the teaching-learning environment.

As observed in the past and applied in the future, all educators must remember what is involved in any effective educational pro-gram (see Figure 1). If we look at this formula, what do teachers really control every day in the classroom or laboratory? Certifi -cation standards in each state gov-ern who can teach and the quali-fi cations needed to be eligible to teach. Students come into our programs basically on their desire to enroll rather than on any admis-sion standards. The agricultural technical content to be included in a curriculum is a place where teachers might have great infl u-

Figure 1: A Model of An Effective Educational Program


ence, but even here some states may have approved curriculum guides that outline what is to be included in a course. The actual agricultural content that needs to be taught in our classrooms and laboratories should be based on the agricultural industry standards. It is here that the industry, society, and general welfare of the public of tomorrow must have a strong infl uence on what is taught in an agricultural education program of the future. The place where the teacher truly has the greatest day-to-day decision making task that will determine the effective-ness of the learning environment is how to put all of these elements of a program into a package that will lead to an effective teaching-learning environment. This is where the art and science of teach-

ing merges and ultimately determines the success of the program. Science en-ters this equation by the fact that the teacher, in planning a lesson, should incorporate the fi ndings of research studies which identify those teaching practices and approaches that lead to an effective teaching-learning environ-ment. The art enters the picture once the bell rings and class begins. Once the instruction begins, the teacher must be ready spontaneously to bring in thoughts that occur on the spot and that relate to the teaching material, take advantage of relevant stu-dent input not envisioned, use current events or ac-tivities that may have oc-

curred recently and that relate to the content, and use any unfore-seen input that will help to bring into clearer focus the material to be learned. This is where the true science and art of teaching merg-es, that being the blending of the science of good teaching with the humanistic and personal strengths of the teacher.

In a review of the writings of early educational philosophers on the subject of effective teach-ing and learning in Ulich’s book, Three Thousand Years of Edu-cational Wisdom, one will fi nd that Lancelot’s three principles of learning refl ect what the early educational philosophers thought and wrote about many years ago. Thus, until such time that sci-ence produces an injection, pill, or

Dr. John R. Crunkilton is a Profes-sor Emeritus in the Department of Agricultural, Leadership, and Community Education, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA.

brain microchip to instill knowl-edge in humans, we as teachers must continue to use and apply ba-sic teaching-learning principles in our teaching environment in order to expect and achieve an effective teaching-learning educational pro-gram. It is imperative that teacher certifi cation course syllabi today and in the future continue to in-clude those basic fundamental principles of good teaching-learn-ing.

References

Crunkilton, J. R. and Krebs, A. H. (1982) Teaching agricul-ture through problem solving. Third Edition, Danville, Il-linois: The Interstate Printers and Publishers, Inc.

Lancelot, W. H. (`1944) Perma-nent learning. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Ulich, R. (1961) Three thousand years of educational wisdom. Second Edition. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Uni-versity Press.

Skill development and problem solving go hand-in-hand in agricultural education pro-grams. (Photo courtesy of Stacy Gartin.)


Modern Day Interpersonal Skills in Agricultural Education

by Taylor Cooper

As a soon to be second generation agricultur-al education teacher, I enjoy comparing the

teaching style that my father de-veloped when he went to college 30 years ago with the one that I am creating for myself currently. The

differences between the two are astounding. Whereas he learned to focus more on the production side of agriculture because that was what was going to be essen-tial for the kids of that time, I am learning that developing a differ-ent set of skills that are essential for students in the 21st century. In-terpersonal skills such as critical thinking, adaptability and collabo-ration are becoming the essential skills for students when they enter the work force in our modern day society. The best way for students to really develop these skills is for teachers to apply them in aspects of the three-circle model that ag-

ricultural education is based. The three-circles that make up the ba-sis of agriculture education consist of: SAE or supervised agricultural experience, FFA participation, and fi nally classroom learning. It is in these different circles of agricul-tural education that we see these century skills being applied.

In the supervised agriculture experience (SAE), students are ex-pected to begin and manage their own project. This project can be one that focuses on what students may do at home, on the farm or another job they may have. Criti-cal thinking plays a huge role in what a student must complete with their SAE projects (Lamm, 2012). With critical thinking skills, stu-dents are able to solve problems that they may come across during their projects. If there is a shortage of feed for their herd of cows or if one of their tractors broke down during planting, students need to possess these critical thinking

skills to help with that. With criti-cal thinking skills, students will be able to work around any problem that is set in front of them.

In FFA, a leadership based or-ganization that students can partic-ipate in outside of their classroom learning, students have a wide range of different competitions and other activities that students can participate in. Through career development events or competi-tions, students are afforded the op-portunity to discover and tap into their potential as leaders (Rose, 2014). Adaptability is one skill that is essential for potential lead-ers and students to gain from FFA. Because of the numerous different competitions that are offered to students of this organization, they must be able to be diverse enough to participate in any of these com-petitions at a moment’s notice. On the other side of FFA, the ability for students to be adaptable at dif-ferent conventions really shows how well they can fi t into new environments and organize them-selves into a group. Adaptability in the workplace is essential for working in a new surroundings as compared to their past setting.

In an agricultural education classroom, students are able to learn information that is more

Editor’s Note: The National Collegiate Agricultural Education Essay Contest is held in October of each year with partici-pants developing their essays from a topic selected by the host chapter advisor. The essays are presented at the National ATA Conclave. Students competed in two divisions this year: the traditional Individual Essay division and the Co-Author division (two or more authors). The winning essays are included in this issue.

The agricultural education three-circle model plays an important part in developing modern day skill sets that are required for stu-dents of this generation.


Taylor Cooper is a junior Agricultur-al Education major at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

agriculture based through classes such as animal science or agri-business. It is in these classes that we see skills such as collaboration and communication really come forth. Harnessing that and teach-ing them “how” to collaborate is critical in ensuring they learn this skill and can apply it successfully in all educational and life situa-tions (Jones, 2015). By allowing students to work in groups really allows collaboration between stu-dents to become stronger. They are forced to communicate with each other and work on ways to solve a problem or work on a worksheet. If students don’t have these skills going into college or the work place, working with oth-ers will not go well.

In conclusion, the three-cir-cle model for agricultural educa-tion consisting of SAEs, FFA and classroom instruction play an im-

portant part in developing modern day skill sets that will be required for students of this generation. The competition for jobs is starting to pick up, requiring more interper-sonal skills as compared to when my father was in college when they were taught that production skills could get any agriculture student the job they wanted. The world is changing and it is impor-tant for all agricultural education instructors, new as well as old, to learn how to apply all of them in their everyday lives.

Bibliography

Jones, V. R. (2015). 21st century skills: Collaboration. Chil-dren's Technology & Engi-neering, 20(1), 24-26.

Lamm, A. J., Rhodes, E. B., Irani, T. A., Roberts, T. G., Unruh Snyder, L. J., & Brendemuhl, J. (2012). Utilizing natural

cognitive tendencies to en-hance agricultural education programs. Journal of Agricul-tural Education, 52(2), 12–23 DOI: 10.5032/jae.2011.02012

Rose, C. B. (2014). The benefi ts of FFA membership as part of the three-circle model in agricul-ture education. Master's The-sis, University of Tennessee.

I have always loved the fast pace of the city and am interested in bringing the rural agriculture that I grew up with to the city and urbanizing it. However, my long term goal is to become a professor of Agriculture Education at a university because I want to be able to help educate our next generation of Agriculture Education Teachers. To pass on my knowledge of what I have learned in my time and inspire our next generation of Ag. Educators is my greatest passion. This passion stems from my father and his drive to educate others as well. I want to be able to continue where he leaves off and continue to spread the knowledge he and many others have bestowed upon me.

I have always said there is only one thing that can bring our nation down – our dependence on foreign countries for food and energy. Agriculture is the back-bone of our economy. John Salazar


How the Three Circle Model Develops 21st Century Skills in Students

by Erin Yoest and Miranda Kane

The dynamics of profes-sionalism were much different before the turn of the century. Soci-

ety has since shifted and realized that perhaps soft skills, known as twenty-fi rst century skills, are just what people need for success-ful careers. Alongside society’s push for these skills are agricul-tural education programs and the

implementation of the three circle model. It is the framework for any effi cient agricultural program. The three components of this model are classroom/laboratory instruc-tion, FFA, and supervised agricul-tural experience. When all three of these components are imple-mented correctly, it generates stu-dent success. Therefore classroom instruction yields problem solving skills, FFA creates leadership and teamwork, and SAE provides crit-ical thinking and responsibility.

Classroom and laboratory in-struction present problem-based learning of topics within the ag-riculture and natural resources in-dustries. These industries are con-

stantly changing due to advances in science and technology, which means the curriculum, is constant-ly changing to match the industry growth. One example is the natu-ral gas industry. This industry has brought jobs to small town com-munities and recent high school graduates. Students also attend college to gain skills for work in the oil fi eld. Students can develop the basic skills and knowledge on the industry in an agriculture

classroom. By having hands-on experience that agricultural edu-cation promotes, students can look critically at situations presented to them. The classroom component prepares students for careers in in-novating new solutions to world issues through problem solving skills.

The second component of the three circle model is FFA. FFA is an intra-curricular orga-nization that strives for students to develop premier leadership, personal growth, and career suc-cess through the many opportu-nities available to students. The FFA has a code of ethics, offi cial

dress, multiple leadership confer-ences, career development events, and awards. Each of these factors in FFA cultivates strong leaders who can effectively communicate and be team players. Employers constantly seek recommendations and skills that emphasize this. Skill sets are installed in students through all that the FFA offers. Career development events, for example, are contests that allow students to develop career-ready skills and self-effi ciency based on Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory (Phipps, Osborne, Dryer, & Ball, 2008). FFA is connected to the classroom through these contests and the ever changing in-dustry of agriculture.

The fi nal component of the three circle model is supervised agricultural experience, or SAE. Students have projects that they keep records on throughout the year. These projects are based on the problem-solving approach used in the classroom. Twenty-fi rst century skills are gained through students participating in the real-life situations that SAEs present. Students become market-able for employment because of these projects. They gain skills in record keeping, fi nances, and critical thinking. They develop a sense of responsibility that is im-portant for young members of so-ciety to have. SAE programs are integrated into the classroom and FFA experience through applica-tion of information learned in the classroom and profi ciency awards.

The major result of the study was that stu-dents who participated in the program gained social skills, possessed knowledge of the in-dustry, and were capable of becoming effec-tive members of society.


When all three components are implemented in a program, students gain the twenty-fi rst cen-tury skills needed in the workforce today. According to a study pub-lished in the Journal of Agricultur-al Education, In a contextualized learning environment, such as the agricultural education classroom, students use knowledge learned in class (i.e. FFA, SAE projects, etc.), to transfer and apply in daily life (Dailey, Conroy, & Shelley-Tolbert, 2001). The major result of this study was that students who participated in the program gained social skills, possessed knowledge of the industry, and were capable of becoming effective members of society. Each of these skills is learned through the three circle model that agricultural education stands true to today.

Deeper examination of the Three Circle Model reveals that

Erin Yoest is a senior at The Penn-sylvania State University major-ing in Agricultural and Extension Education.

Miranda Kane is a Junior at The Pennsylvania State University majoring in Agricultural and Ex-tension Education and minoring in Spanish. She is from Elverson, PA and grew up in Chester County.

just as the three circles in the dia-gram overlap, so do the skills. This is perhaps the most critical part of the Three Circle Model and how it relates to the twenty-fi rst century skills. Students can walk away not only learning the skills, but apply-ing it and using it in all aspects of agricultural education and life.

Bibliography

Dailey, A., Conroy, C., & Shel-ley-Tolbert, C. (2001). Using agricultural education as the context to teach life skills. Journal of Agricultural Edu-cation, 42(1), 11-20.

Phipps, L., Osborne, E., Dyer, J., & Ball, A. (2008). Handbook on agricultural education in public schools (6th ed.). Clif-ton Park, NY: Thomson Del-mar Learning.

Does Agricultural Education Have a Future? (continued from page 2)

ning to sound like a broken record but this leads to a deeper under-standing of the subjects and im-proves the retention of the knowl-edge.

Implemented properly the leadership component (FFA Or-ganization) becomes a valuable teaching component. It provides incentives for students to excel in their classroom/laboratory educa-tion, as well as their experiential learning components. It is the tool that is used to teach leadership and citizenship skills.

Does agricultural education have a future? The content and composition of agricultural edu-cation programs have changed radically since its inception. Just as the number of individuals in-volved in production agriculture has dropped steadily to a low of less than three percent, the com-position of agricultural education programs has changed from a majority of “farm students” to to-day’s programs composed of few “farm students.” There is still a need for a workforce of individu-als with knowledge of agriculture

concepts, therefore there is still a need for agricultural education at the high school. As we change programs to meet these new cir-cumstances, don’t forget the cor-nerstones of our success to date: experiential learning, problem solving, kinesthetic learning, and the leadership component. If we keep these items as cornerstones of our program, agricultural edu-cation will have a bright and pros-perous future.




Date post:	26-Feb-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Sep Oct 2015-final · 2018. 6. 8. · September October 2015 3 Subscriptions Subscription price for...

Documents